Patna Court November 2005 Judgments
Baban Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-30-2005
Shiva Kirti Singh, J.1. This writ petition has been hard in detail at the stage of admission itself and is being disposed of finally with consent of the parties.2. Petitioner was initially appointed as a Constable in Bihar Military Police, Battalion 10 and he joined the said post on 1.2.1968. As has been confirmed from the original service book of the petitioner, at the time of joining petitioner had given his age as 21 years by only mentioning his year of birth as 1947. On that basis the concerned Commandant issued a letter bearing No. 28 dated 5.12.2003 addressed to the DIG (Personnel), Bihar in which date of retirement of several police employees were mentioned and against petitioner's name the date of retirement was shown as 30.6.2005. Petitioner did not protest against such date decided on 5.12.2003 but subsequently by memo No. 1095 dated 29.5.2004 (Annexure-5) date of retirement of several police employees were revised by the Commandant, BMP 14 and petitioner's date of retiremen...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Yatan Singh @ Ram JatIn Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Mridula Mishra, J.1. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State.2. Relief sought for in the present writ application is for making payment of retiral dues and other lawful claims of the petitioner, such as CPF and gratuity with statutory interest.3. Petitioner's case is that he was appointed on the vacant post of Sales Man in regular pay scale in Khadi Bhawan, Patna, which is one of the units of Bihar State Khadi and Village Industries Board, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'). He joined on 18.2.1963 and after serving near about 33 years retired from service on 31.1.1999. During his service period, on the order of the Administrative Officer, Khadi Bhawan, Gaya, petitioner was asked to act as an Accountant and while continuing on the post of Accountant a police case bearing Muffasil Gaya PS case No. 302 of 1998 was lodged by Mahesh Prasad, the then District Khadi Gramodyog Officer, Gaya. Case was instituted against Suresh Prasad Singh, Manager and the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Rai and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-28-2005
M.L. Visa, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 01.06.1992 passed by Vllth Additional Sessions Judge, Patna in Sessions Trial No. 30 of 1990 convicting and sentencing all the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years under Sections 307/149 of Indian Penal Code (In short 'IPC'). Appellant Ashok Rai has been further convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 148 of IPC and other appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each under Section 147 of IPC. Sentences passed against the appellants have been ordered to run concurrently.2. The case of prosecution, in short, is that on 15.01.1989 at about 7 a.m., informant Suresh Rdi (PW 3) was going to attend call of nature towards east of his house when in the way, all the appellants variously armed with lathi and bhala, surrounded him and with an intent to kill him started assaulting him. Appellan...
Tag this Judgment!Sargun Kapri Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-28-2005
M.L. Visa, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 09.04.1992 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Banka in Sessions Trial No. 731 of 1990/490 of 1992 convicting and sentencing the sole appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code (In short 'IPC') and rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 323 of IPC but ordering both the sentences to run concurrently.2. The case of prosecution, in short, is that on 19.06.1990 at about 2 p.m., Babita Kumari (PW 6), the victim/informant had gone to attend call of nature to the field of one Mahendra Pandit (PW 2) and after easing out when she was tying up the waist band of her shalwar, the appellant caught hold of her from behind and when she raised alarm, he threw her and pressed her mouth, made her naked and started committing rape on her. When victim/informant protested, appellant asked her to keep quiet otherwise she would be killed and he forcibly...
Tag this Judgment!Kedar Nath Singh Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-28-2005
Mridula Mishra, J.1. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State.2. Grievance of the petitioner is that though his name, as eye witness, is in the FIR of Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 28 of 2003, his name was not included in the charge-sheet as witness. The informant filed a protest petition wherein also petitioner's name was as an eye-witness. The witnesses who were examined during trial, have also named this petitioner as an eye-witness in their deposition, as he was present at the place of occurrence. Even then the petitioner's application filed on 3.9.2005, for examining him as an eye-witness, has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, Siwan vide order dated 8.9.2005. A copy of the deposition of one of the eye-witnesses has also been annexed to the writ petition from which it transpires that the petitioner was present at the place of occurrence and his statement was taken by the police.3. In such a circumstance rejectio...
Tag this Judgment!Dinesh Kumar @ Dinesh Rai Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-28-2005
Barin Ghosh, J.1. There is no dispute that the petitioner was married to Ms. Sunita Devi. There is also no dispute that the marriage of the petitioner with Ms. Sunita Devi was dissolved by a decree of Court on 23rd June, 2000. Further there is no dispute that the petitioner married Ms. Sangita Devi. The only dispute is while the Army Authorities proceeded on the basis that said marriage was solemnized on 29.11.1998, i.e., when the marriage of the petitioner with Ms. Sunita Devi had not been dissolved by decree of Court, the petitioner is contending otherwise. This marriage of the petitioner with Ms. Sangita Devi has been treated by the Army Authorities as plural marriage of the petitioner and accordingly by an order passed on 27.1.04, the petitioner has been discharged from service. The petitioner contended that he married Ms. Sangita Devi subsequent to 23rd June, 2000, i.e., after obtaining the decree of divorce dissolving the marriage of the petitioner with Ms. Sunita Devi.2. The Ar...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
R.N. Prasad, J.1. The petitioners have approached 'this Court for quashing the order dated 29.6.1999 whereby their representation for appointment on Class III post on compassionate ground has been rejected, Annexure 1 and also for a direction to the respondents to consider their case for appointment against Class III past.2. The father of the petitioners were in Government service, They died in harness. The petitioners filed applications for their appointment on compassionate ground. The claim of the petitioners is that they had qualification and their names were recommended by the Committee for appointment on Class III post. The respondents instead of appointment as recommended by the Departmental Compassionate Appointment Committee issued letter dated 28.9.1992, Annexure 3, stating that on consideration it was fond that Class IV post is Available and the department is ready to appoint them on Class IV post and as such submit an affidavit within a period of thirty days indicating th...
Tag this Judgment!Tunni @ Tunni Sah @ Hari Shankar Sah Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
I.P. Singh, J.1. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the Code). It is directed against the entire proceeding against the present petitioner arising out of Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 44 of 2000 (G.R. No. 543/2000) and also for a direction to the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj to pass an order of acquittal and for the release of the petitioner in Trial No. 162 of 2003.2. It has been contended that the aforesaid case was instituted against the present petitioner on 30.3.2000 and in absence of Juvenile Board it proceeded in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj. As yet the enquiry trial against the petitioner has not been concluded even after the lapses of four years six months. The petitioner was sent to remand home on 7.4.2000 and since then he is rotting there. Due to the illegal and arbitrary action of the learned Court below the freedom and liberty of the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Chandeshwar Prasad and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
1. This Reference is necessitated on account of the observations made by the learned Single Judge in CWJC. No. 15551 of 2001, recorded on 19.3.2002, in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the proceedings recorded in Minapur Panchayat, on 26.11.2001, relating to the consideration of 'No Confidence Motion' initiated against the then pramukh and the then up-pramukh. The learned Single Judge in an elaborate reasoned judgment while concluding passed the following observations in the penultimate paragraph and the last paragraph of the said judgment.Let the matter be placed before My Lord, the Chief Justice for issuing proper directions to place the matter before a larger Bench. The Division Bench may also like to issue instructions/directions to the State Government to issue instructions or to frame rules in relation to form, submission and consideration of No Confidence Motion, specially that if pramukh himself fixes the date of such meeting to consider th...
Tag this Judgment!Sharda Devi Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the State and learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party No. 2.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 5.6.2003 by which her claim for enhancement of the maintenance originally granted in exercise of powers under Section 125, Cr. P.C has been declined. The claim for such enhancement would have been prepared on 4.2.2000.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Court would have erred in the impugned order by refusing to exercise jurisdiction. The petitioner would have preferred an application for enhancement of the maintenance allowance of Rs. 300 granted by order dated 31.1.1997. The fact that her claim against award of the aforesaid amount would have been rejected in Criminal Revision on 6.4.1999 as also by the Court in Cr. WJC No. 415 of 1999 on 28.10.1999 directing her to seek her remedies for enhancement before the Magistrate concerned, would not affect her statu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »